Barnack

IF you use HDMI with feature like 4K and HFR (or play video games on a tv), it could interesting to look what version of HDMI your cable use depending if your TV and video card can support hdmi 2 for example . https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HDMI#Main_specifications For 60 hz in 4K, you need at least 1.3/1.4B if not 2.0, for 120 hz, 2.0+

I think giant movie leaving little cultural impact is more the norm now than the exception. Rogue One and Finding Dory, Invincible 2 for example, imagine the place Jurassic World Fallen Kingdom will have in 2025 if you think Catching fire presence in 2020 is strangely low. It is maybe even rare outside for the first entry of a franchise to have massive cultural relevance (Empire strike back - Godfather 2 are giant but not the norm), so much that talking about the franchise as a whole could become the only way to talk about it. For that I would nominate the Dan Brown cinematic universe, the book side is an all time phenomenon and still is quite relevant but the cinematic universe that started with an over 750M first entry is probably close to nil in relevance. In the current top 50 unadjusted, I will not be surprised (if they are not irrelevant now) that in less than 20 year's: Incredibles 2 Rogue One Lion King remake Dory Frozen 2 Toy Story 4 Jurassic World Fallen kingdom Secret life of pets Will be quite low. Everything MCU related will have the chance to be automatically kept alive by MCU marathon.

Really some of the greatest legs of all time......

That not what I have seen in leaked contract, they are very similar to the older TV contract. Studio sign year's in advance those contract, they will look like: In the next 3 year's, all movie released in theater will be available to play on netflix for X months, Y months after they started to play in theater. If they are family movie they will cost a certain amount, with a breakdown of how much they have made in box office, say 7% of what they made. If they are not family movie a different rate. For a famous example: https://www.wvlt.tv/content/news/Netflix-signs-deal-with-Disney-for-movies-on-streaming-site-380767761.html Sony Netflix USA deal for their animated title looked like this: For example Sony animated movies deal with Netflix USA was charging that much for each movies: Domestic Box Office Tiers: Incremental Percentage to DBO to be Paid as the License Fee: Cumulative License Fee at Top of Range: $0 to $10,000,000 32.5% $3,250,000 $10,000,001 to $15,000,000 28.0% $4,650,000 $15,000,001 to $25,000,000 23.5% $7,000,000 $25,000,001 to $75,000,000 19.0% $16,500,000 $75,000,001 to $100,000,000 15.0% $20,250,000 $100,000,001 to $125,000,000 10.0% $22,750,000 $125,000,001 to $150,000,000 5.0% $24,000,000 $150,000,001 to $199,999,999 - $24,000,000 $200,000,000 to + $25,000,000 I think that price was for 2 different 18 month windows (separated to give some TV channel exclusivity between the 2)

Usually ROI do take into account how long between all the revenue stream happen and when the expense happen, you are not wrong to think about that (some company like Costco are build around the model of making the money before spending it, usually 100% of Costco profit occur before they spend money). Company will tend to have an expected annual return that project will want to beat that will be used to actualize every future revenue stream to when the money is spent ($100 next year is worst $90.9 now, $100 in 2 year is worth $82.6 now and so on) Interest cost is different than opportunity cost, tv/movie project can often be made on a credit line (with an insurance) depending on who own the negative and so on, once the movie is done and respect contract obligation the studio pay for it: From Wikipedia: Negative pickup deal[edit] A negative pickup deal is a contract entered into by an independent producer and a movie studio wherein the studio agrees to purchase the movie from the producer at a given date and for a fixed sum. Until then, the financing is up to the producer, who must pay any additional costs if the film goes over-budget. Generally, a producer will have a bank/lender lend against the value of the negative pickup contract as a way to shore up their financing package of the film. This is commonly referred to as "factoring paper". Most major North American studio and network contracts (incl. basic cable) are collateralized/factored by the bank at 100% of the contract value, and the lender just takes a basic origination/setup fee. When that model is use, there is interest cost accumulating but not necessarily much spent out of pocket before the pick-up date. Not sure if they worked like that, but it was for a long time common to do it like that (could create a number company that will own the movie, take the loan and so on). It seem to still be the model: https://www.forbes.com/sites/schuylermoore/2019/05/10/film-financing-with-loans/#9963c5300d2e For large film companies (e.g. studios and VOD companies), obtaining loans is relatively easy; they can either obtain large lines of credit, or they can use negative pick-ups. Under this latter structure, the bank loans to a special-purpose entity formed to produce the film, and the film company commits to pay the cost of the film on delivery, repaying the bank. A giant studio like Disney tend to have good interest rate in the current environment, I would imagine under 5% So I am really not sure how to look at it, either they pay interest all that time (but with current Disney bond/credit line a low amount) or they did spend money and are not paying interest on the project and the opportunity cost, but maybe not both at the same time.

Unlike everything else, most of the SVOD model is a bit like gym membership, usage cost them money it does not make them money, new user would be an interesting metric.

That a giant if, SVOD does not seem to make sense for high budget movie and if the window between VOD and SVOD become small it will be hard to ask for big amount on it. But take the DVD peak era of 2006, when studio printed money from dvds, did they ever thought of not putting movies in theater ? What would they gain from not putting their movies in the theater ? Theater is still the only pay by head model available (that could change soon with technology, but it will still be for a while) and putting your movie in theater tend to rise is status and it's VOD/streaming value.

Look how console large budget game and online game did thrive where piracy is very small versus large budget single player PC game (that do not exist much anymore, almost of all it is console port, no ?) since high speed Internet became common. Same can by said for extremely low price SVOD offer versus all the rest on the movie side. Piracy hurt so much that the console industry became mostly a way to create harder for piracy content to work normal PC by now.

I think this is true, but HBO offer a free trial, even if it is no a sensible model, for some one or 2 time stunt maybe you can attract people that would get a 7 days free trial to watch a movie and forget to unsubscribe (or like once they try it)

Here our government is actively asking celebrity of all field to do that kind of stuff to reach younger audience to promote lockdown among them. Could be the same by other government around the world I would imagine, you can do it while still doing this: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/coronavirus-ryan-reynolds-blake-lively-feeding-america-food-banks-canada-a9407676.html https://www.usatoday.com/story/entertainment/celebrities/2020/03/17/coronavirus-justin-bieber-ryan-reynolds-blake-lively-more-donate/5066392002/ Fallon for example made a donation to feeding america early this week. The level of faux outrage is quite something.

It is really evitable, live music concert are still quite popular, vinyl are still popular and maybe more relevant opera-live theater do still very much exist. Theatrical is a not risk to end this century imo, the only risk is for them to become like live-theater and opera are currently, a more hispter-niche affair (with some Hamilton type going through from time to time instead of all the time like now for movies) and not a mass popular one.

Will be interesting if price modeling by release (movie for which a party make sense like a new MCU/Star wars), family, couple type of movie price differently. Because yes for the people that get concession at the theater this get way less expensive. But piracy and SVOD make giant pressure to keep the price low.

Oh didn't thought of that at all (hided BO making it a more fun trivia)

https://www.boxofficemojo.com/date/2019-09-05/?ref_=bo_di_table_364 last year september 5, no movie above 690k

Married is an important variable, but what being part of that demo tell us ? And would you say the same for your parents if they lived all life together ? Yes chart that plot average can be misleading, but those are median, 50% are above that figure, 50% below, the Gates move a median graph 10 times less than the ten couple struggling

The median american married couple with children tend to be among the richest entity on earth: That paid way more to see Avatar in 3D and pop-corn when well into a recession. Significantly more than half of them are millionaires (that could change quick too like in 2008).

It is insane if you watch alone and compare it to the price of one movie ticket (like most per per view fight or pretty much anything), has a family of 4 use to buy pop-corn on location or couple that pay parking/babysitter it can look more sensible.

I imagine everyone on that picture should get tested (2 of them tested positive):

Other studio will often have a theatrical agreement (with a P&A budget-minimum theater count and so on) it with the co-production house (when Cloverfiled went to netflix for example, it had a battle between Elisson, the studio, etc..), the trial between Woody Allen and Amazon being a example of this. That part I imagine Disney will not have at least, because they pretty much do their movie by themselve.

Financial of those model are not counted by view, but by new or preserved account or ability to rise price, making it quite algorithmic/mathematics model evaluation.

I imagine a movie targeting really young kids can get away with a bit more.

Still some time to polish them off at least, maybe it will look less rough in theater. They did feel weak for a 2020 giant Disney affair that had a giant and impressive set to help.

Apparently Italy lock down has a giant amount of people not complying, pregnant woman and old people in the parks today.

There is a lot of chaos if something cause a big commotion or not, slow news days or not, being any type of far away from the latest mass shooting that the news/society made a big deal of (that Molson Coors one for example didn't seem to caught at all) being an important variable as well if it will make noise. As things are going I feel it could make very little noise.

I guess for how long people will split 20th century studio films from Disney result will be a factor, maybe the shift will occur only with Avatar 2 release and not before.